topic Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife in EF & RF Lenses

Looking for a good lense for wildlife

MrSpaceTeacher — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 17:08:40 GMT

Hello all! I'm a recently transformed astrophotographer, and I'm now focusing on nature and wildlife.

I own a Canon 80D with lense options of 18-55mm and 75-300mm.

I'm looking for a good lense to add for farther out wildlife and nature photography.

Thank you all for the help! I'm realizing that this is a far different skill set than I'm used to.

Jim

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

kvbarkley — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 19:09:05 GMT

Almost any of the 150-600 mm lenses work great.

This a crop.

This shows how far away they were. One of the dots in the water are these otters.

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

cicopo — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 20:14:43 GMT

I agree with the above advice & can warn you that you are correct thinking there is a learning curve. Longer lenses mean steadier hands & faster shutter speeds or a very good tripod. Fortunately they do come with image stabilizers built in

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

kvbarkley — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 20:20:33 GMT

My shots above are a good example. I was on a cliff in *very* windy conditions. I had to balance the lens on my knees. The bright sunlight saved me. BTW, this was just south of Big Sur.

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

ebiggs1 — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:39:56 GMT

"I'm looking for a good lense to add for farther out wildlife and nature photography."

Unlike astro work wildlife photography is not about a long tele lens to shoot farther away stuff. It is to make small and tiny stuff appear larger in the camera's frame. In fact the number one rule in wildlife photography is get closer. As suggested above any of the 150-600mm super zooms is a good choice. That is if price vs performance usability is considered. There are better but more, to way more, expensive choices.

Another good choice if you like prime lenses, more like what is used in astro work, would be the EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Lens. One more is the EF 300mm f/4L IS USM Lens and adding the 1.4x telecon. This gives you more FL choice in a prime lens.

A brand new to the market is the Sigma 60-600mm f/4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens. It is heavy and big and spectacular.

If you wnat to remain Canon the only real offering they have in the super zoom category is the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens. It is excellent and handles the 1.4x telecon very well.

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

ebiggs1 — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 15:38:40 GMT

"I own a Canon 80D with lense options of 18-55mm and 75-300mm."

Just curious, you did astro work with these lenses?

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

MrSpaceTeacher — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 18:20:19 GMT

Haha nooooo. This is just what I've had for hobby photography for a couple of years.

For astrophotography I used imaging telescopes with mono-cameras designed for eyepieces.

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

ebiggs1 — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 18:54:08 GMT

Ok, wow, any of the lens suggested will be lightyears better than those.

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

ebiggs1 — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 21:37:50 GMT

Again the purpose of a super telephoto for wildlife is to make small animals look larger in the frame. Or put another way fill the frame with the subject. To this getting closer is key. Closer is always better than more FL. As you distance increases the ability of the lens to resolve the subject goes down as seen from the critters in the cliff/ocean photo above.

I was about 35' to 40' from this magnificent hawk. He/she was getting impatient from my intense interest in taking the photo.

Telephoto lenses let you keep a safe distance form subjects that can express their will, sometimes forcefully, on you.

A crop of another shot of the same hawk.

EOS 1D Mk IV, Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens@600mm, f6.3, 1/2000, ISO 800

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

wq9nsc — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 03:34:25 GMT

The 400 f5.6 that Ernie mentioned is a very good lens that I have owned for years. In addition to producing sharp images, it also focuses very quickly which is critical for wildlife.

There are times that the 1.4X extenders are useful but with the increasing pixel count of DSLRs and sensors that offer excellent images with a moderate number of pixels (like the 20 MP sensor used in the 1DX III), cropping versus using a 1.4X is something to consider.

I went to Iowa earlier this week to photograph eagles and most shots were with a 1DX III and EF 800 f5.6 and I used a Canon 1.4X converter part of the time but even with an expensive prime and 1 series camera the focus acquisition slows a bit and that effect is worse with less capable lenses and bodies. When the eagles were sitting still, I used the 1.4X some but in general I found I was happier with the bare lens. And as Ernie noted, the closer you can get the better but since the river ice was thin (which is why the eagles were there) I wasn't going swimming in freezing water with my cameras 🙂

This series was shot with the 1DX III and bare EF 800. Once the eagle was on the ice, I could have added the 1.4X but if I had done that I likely would have missed the next good eagle action. These images were all using around 25% of the 1DX III's sensor so pretty heavily cropped.

Rodger

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

wq9nsc — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 03:43:12 GMT

And it is also easy to have too much focal length at times for wildlife. This is where zoom versus prime comes into play and sometimes it would be better to give up some focus speed and sharpness for the versatility of a zoom. With fast moving wildlife, even with a zoom you don't want to try to nearly fill the frame because the movement is too unpredictable. Shooting football I can do pretty well filling much of the sensor area with the desired subject but unlike football I have almost no ability to predict what wildlife is going to do.

This next series is an example of too much focal length. This eagle was doing some interesting maneuvering and I was tracking him nicely with the EF 800 when he suddenly went to full afterburner on a vector in my direction. If I hadn't been freezing in 8F weather with a heavy wind I might have been able to switch to my second body with the EF 400 f2.8 in time but close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades so I missed a golden opportunity. The first shot I didn't anticipate his dive speed rate of change and the very shallow depth of field got me so he is not quite in critical focus and not in frame. The next two are a little better but the eagle was moving too fast to frame perfectly. If you do frame such a shot perfectly, it will be an incredible shot but the odds are very much against you. So if you go with a zoom, don't attempt to over zoom when using it.

Rodger

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

MrSpaceTeacher — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 14:18:58 GMT

Exactly what I'm looking for!

The new Samyung Sports is a little out of my price range.

Is this the correct lens that was mentioned that you both recommended?

[link removed and replaced with screengrab to facilitate discussion]

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

wq9nsc — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 14:46:52 GMT

That is it and it will work well with the 1.4X converter. Your 80D can still use AF with the EF 400 f5.6 and 1.4X which turns it into a 560mm f8 lens.

I shot a lot of afternoon soccer games with that lens before upgrading to the 400 f2.8 but I have kept the lens and it often goes hiking due to its very manageable weight and size. The image below was shot with the EF 400 f5.6 on a Canon 1D Mark II at ISO 800 which was pretty high for that body. The 400 f5.6 grabs focus quickly without hunting.

Rodger

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

ebiggs1 — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 15:14:16 GMT

That is the correct lens. Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Lens.

This is one of a few, very few, lenses that I say everybody should have. If today I was told I could only have one telephoto lens this would be it. The only other lens I see as this good for the cost is the Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM Lens as long as I could have the 1.4x telcon wih it. In fact I just might prefer that combo come to think about it. It would be a little more expensive but it offers two FLs and IS which the 400mm doesn't have.

BTW, I am not a fan and don't recommend the use of the 1.4x telcon on the EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Lens. Two things happen, one is you lose the f5.6 and two, you lose IQ. Neither is good! On the other hand the 300mm f4 becomes a f5.6 at 420mm which is still very good. The 300mm has enough IQ so if a little is lost it is still OK. The IS can be a big plus.

The EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Lens is so light it is a joy to hand hold. This is a key factor to keep in mind. Keep the SS in the upper range and fire away.

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

ebiggs1 — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 15:18:54 GMT

"The new Samyung Sports is a little out of my price range."

It is Sigma Sport and, yes, two grand is a hill for sure. But in this category of lenses it is not out of the reason. The Canon super primes cost several times that amount. However, one thing is they are lifetime lenses. They are build to take whatever you throw are them. They are heavy and the are big. Most of all they are fantastic!

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

wq9nsc — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 16:01:39 GMT

I basically agree with Ernie that I would much prefer to use the bare lens when possible but there are times when the 1.4X is useful but don't go into it expecting to use the 1.4X all of the time. When the lighting is decent AND the subject is fairly stationary, the 1.4X with some lenses (most of the primes that accept them) works pretty well. The 1.4X will always decrease IQ (sharpness, contrast, and color saturation all take a hit) so it is a tradeoff between two suboptimal choices: more severe cropping or loss in IQ along with f stop and focus speed when using the 1.4X.

Which way to go varies with situation, lens, and body. I am much happier when I can use the lens by itself but in the right situation the converter does add utility and I usually have it with me. The case for my EF 400 f2.8 has molded openings for both the 1.4X and 2X converter and the 1.4X is usually with me just in case I need it. I have the Canon 2X version II and I have seldom used it and don't love any of the shots I have taken with it even when using the super sharp EF 300 and EF 400 f2.8 great white primes. The 300 or 400 f2.8 with a 2X produces a good image and it is a better image than many cheaper lenses will produce bare BUT once you compare the lens with a 2X to the bare lens it is depressing. I used some B&H bonus bucks years ago to buy a 2X but I wouldn't advise its purchase regardless of which lens you buy.

And as Ernie notes, the 300 is a very useful focus length and with the 1.4X the f4 turns into a 420mm f5.6. I have never shot with the 300 f4 but I used the 300 f2.8 with 1.4X quite a few times when I don't want to deal with the added weight of the incredible 400 f2.8.

I tried to find a couple of good comparison shots from Wednesday with and without a converter, realize this is with a 1DX III body and EF 800 f5.6 which work quite well with a 1.4X. With a stationary subject and using a very stout Manfrotto tripod with gimbal head, the teleconverter combo played well. Once the birds were in flight, I was much happier with the handling and performance of the bare lens. These images are heavily cropped (basically 1.4 MP for the first bare lens photos and 2.4 MP for the second 1.4X photo to keep the eagle close to the same size) and the lighting was changing but in this case I think the converter worked OK. But both images were from further away than I would have liked. And NEVER buy a lens expecting to use it with the converter nearly all of the time.

Rodger

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

MrSpaceTeacher — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 16:07:51 GMT

Absolutely incredible information from all involved. This is exactly what I was seeking.

I understand cameras being a known astrophotographer in my community, but putting it into practice has a brand new learning curve that I'm excited to tackle.

Re: Looking for a good lense for wildlife

Waddizzle — Sat, 23 Jan 2021 14:05:37 GMT

@MrSpaceTeacher wrote:
Absolutely incredible information from all involved. This is exactly what I was seeking.

I understand cameras being a known astrophotographer in my community, but putting it into practice has a brand new learning curve that I'm excited to tackle.

If [you are in] the US, I do not recommend Amazon for inexperienced buyers of camera gear. While Amazon is a factory authorized dealer, many of the vendors in the Amazon Marketplace, or whatever they call it, are not.

Beware of buying deeply discounted items from vendors that sell below the prices listed at Canon USA. All factory authorized dealers sell items for the same prices each and every day, and those prices are the same as those offered by Canon USA. Canon USA has a published list of factory authorized dealers in the US, and many appear in the Amazon Marketplace.

However, many are in the Amazon Marketplace that are not listed as being factory authorized dealers by Canon USA. Why is this important to you? Because when you go to register your warranty, Canon USA may not honor a warranty if the product came from a dealer that is not factory authorized.

I shop for Canon cameras and lenses from Canon USA and B&H Photo Video. There are other reputable online dealers. I have had good service with these vendors, and have not had reason to go elsewhere.